Comments by aussieatheist_111

1. Christians challenge teaching of evolution

Comment #204428 by aussieatheist_111 on July 5, 2008 at 12:42 am

Hi Brian,
You bet. But I thought it had been renamed "The World's Biggest T-Shirt Contest"

There are a few good actions planned for it, including an atheist's march from Taylor Square on July 19.

I just hope that the Chaser live up to all expectations and pull off the stunt of their careers. Now there is nothing like popular humour to mobilise the masses.

2. Can't Darwin and God get along?

Comment #202522 by aussieatheist_111 on July 1, 2008 at 3:09 pm

How do we know there isn't some similar mechanism by which God interacts with the world, that God can be understood as a spirit, that God is more like consciousness than a material object? If we have an all-encompassing, pervasive personal being that has created the entire universe, and is coupled to that universe in some way, it just seems to me that the notion of God acting through the world without violating its laws is no more mysterious than us acting through that same world. So I'd say to Dawkins, until you explain to me how human beings interact with the world, don't tell me that God couldn't interact with the world in the same way we do.

I wonder - do you even need consciousness to explain how we interact with the world? Why can't it all be down to atoms and molecules? Does consciousness even play a role in the way we interact with the world? You can't really say yes to this unless you believe in some kind of dualism, or hold the belief that our "consciousness" somehow has causal influence.

When it all boils down, atoms hit other atoms, neurons fire, and information is processed and distributed. You don't need anything mystical to explain this!

3. Saudi Marriage Officiant : 'It Is Allowed To Marry A Girl At The Age Of One'.

Comment #198874 by aussieatheist_111 on June 24, 2008 at 3:30 pm

It is commonly taught in Christianity that Mary was somewhere between 12 and 14 when she conceived Jesus.

The Buddha did not advocate marriage in general but did lay down some general guidelines which does not cover age. It usually depends upon what society adopts Buddhism as to how it views marriage and is not so much a matter of Buddhism itself.

So basically Jesus was popped out of a kid and Buddha was mums the word. Care to try again?

You can get bogged down in cultural relativism when discussing the philosophy of ethics and it essentially is a very unhelpful mode of discussion. Who cares what certain cultures think? I'm more interested as to WHY they think they are right when it comes to ethics...

In my opinion, the only way ethics can be called better than others is by observing what they are based on. Is it rationality and compassion (a basis which not many would deem unworthy...and if so it begs the question WHY?!?!?!) - or superstition and dogma (which many of us would denounce)?

4. Sarcasm Seen as Evolutionary Survival Skill

Comment #198189 by aussieatheist_111 on June 23, 2008 at 10:38 am

Oh dear. This seems to suggest fundamentalist religion is a mental disease:

Fundamentalist: "Hey, listen, God made the world 6000 years ago and then flooded it!"
Bystander: "Yeah, right!"
Fundamentalist walks away feeling vindicated.

This could equally well apply to any argument had with a girlfriend/spouse.

5. On this Day: Galileo Sentenced for Believing Sun Is Center of Universe

Comment #198188 by aussieatheist_111 on June 23, 2008 at 10:34 am

A couple weeks ago while visiting Florence Italy I stopped by the Santa Croce church to see Galileo's tomb...Irregardless, It was a moment of mixed emotions. That's my kind of "pilgrimage".

I can relate to this, having recently paid homage to David Hume's resting place atop a hill in Edinburgh. It was certainly a strange feeling, paying homage to someone I'm reasonably sure can't hear me. But it was ethereal at the same time, and I'm glad to say I felt proud to be an atheist amongst such a great thinker!

6. We Urgently Need Your Help Now!!

Comment #195902 by aussieatheist_111 on June 19, 2008 at 2:41 am

Dear Governor Jindal,

The fact that a foreigner feels compelled to contact yourself speaks of the urgency of the matter at hand. Please do all you can to veto LA Science Education Act SB 733. I'm sure you are aware of the reasons why - unscientific "theories" such as the Intelligent Design movement has absolutely no place in science class rooms, and should be treated with the same respect one would afford creation mythology of any religion. I sincerely doubt you would even CONSIDER allowing Australian Aboriginal dream-time stories to be incoroporated into your great state's science curriculum, no matter how much political clout Australian Aboriginals might wield. Don't "teach the controversy" when there isn't one.

For the good of your nation, (and indeed the scientific world, which relies so heavily on American progress) - stamp down on this ridiculous Act before it stifles the intelligence of the youth.

Yours Sincerely,
Joshua Watt

My two cents, probably worth a lot less when the ID exchange rate is taken into account.

7. Astronomers find batch of 'super-Earths'

Comment #194049 by aussieatheist_111 on June 16, 2008 at 10:31 am

Strategy: convince the nutters that those planets are the place God meant them to live on, have them pool their billions, build a generation ship and off they go. I'd like to keep Earth for reasonable people.

No - that's unfair on those already living there!

8. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #192420 by aussieatheist_111 on June 13, 2008 at 3:25 am

Personally, I've always equated intelligence to perceptiveness - the ability to draw connections between data. People with this kind of intelligence probably ARE less religious, because unless they are being intellectually dishonest (which I'm sure many are) - it is impossible for an intelligent person to ignore the fact that religion doesn't draw accurate lines between points of data.

All in all, probably was a little simplistic, but the basic premise might be sound.

9. Loyal to Its Roots

Comment #191036 by aussieatheist_111 on June 10, 2008 at 6:26 am

I guess God gave morality to plants as well.

10. Albinos, Long Shunned, Face Threat in Tanzania

Comment #190374 by aussieatheist_111 on June 9, 2008 at 1:55 am

This is just sick. In all honesty, humans seem to be innately barbaric, tribal, and superstitious.

It seems that only growing intelligence/rationality produces any kind of inclusive and safe society.

11. New Way To Think About Earth's First Cells

Comment #190370 by aussieatheist_111 on June 9, 2008 at 1:37 am

Very interesting. I'd love to see "life" engineered in the laboratory - the final straw for creationists. How do you think sophisticated (theist) theologians would handle this?

12. Reality wins in Texas!

Comment #189782 by aussieatheist_111 on June 7, 2008 at 9:07 am

Good to hear. But still...there's a veritable ocean of mind-numbing (and unfortunately powerful) irrationalists who remain in need of forcible removal!

13. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187935 by aussieatheist_111 on June 3, 2008 at 4:21 am

Cold Fusion MUST happen elsewhere.. how do you explain the sun being able to do fusion at night?

8)

Precisely! And those stupid Evolutionists - don't they realise that also, The Laws of Thermodynamics actually prevent evolution on earth, because the system can't go from being chaotic to ordered without power input. I don't see any massive external power sources, do you?

Sadly enough, I've actually seen a creationist say something very similar to this...

14. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187670 by aussieatheist_111 on June 2, 2008 at 12:46 pm

In addition, researchers will have to repeat the experiment with larger amounts of the palladium and zirconium oxide mixture in order to generate larger quantities of energy.

How ubiquitous is palladium and how much of it do we actually have? I understand fusion generates vast amounts of energy for very little material loss...but is there a chance we would run out in short order?

15. When two worlds collide: threat of class warfare over faith-based schooling

Comment #187662 by aussieatheist_111 on June 2, 2008 at 12:38 pm

I thought this article was going to be agressively against religion in education then it turned into liberal pandering of the kind that got us where we are now.

If you follow the link you will see that the article actually comprises of two opposing views - one fiercly secular, and the other by a prominent Christian "educator". The editors have compiled the most relevent phrases from each into one article, giving it a "culturally sensitive" wishy-washy tone.

I suggest reading the two opposing views for a greater understanding of the issue.

16. When two worlds collide: threat of class warfare over faith-based schooling

Comment #187570 by aussieatheist_111 on June 2, 2008 at 10:19 am

Bonnor and Caro actually attribute some of the growth of non-government schooling to parent anxiety, and they come perilously close to arguing that choice in schooling - if that choice is for a faith-based school - is akin to intellectual deprivation.

Well...isn't it?

17. Group wants Wi-Fi banned from public buildings

Comment #186683 by aussieatheist_111 on May 31, 2008 at 2:58 am

"What chance do you really think an Oxford Professor may have in making a substantive difference here?"

Not to sound ingratiating, but the holder of the Chair for the Public Understanding of Science might.

Regardless, defeatism is probably an undesirable attitude to take in these irrational times.

Cheers

18. 'Spiritual' dentist fined $10,000

Comment #180611 by aussieatheist_111 on May 15, 2008 at 10:27 am

Wow - this man makes me ashamed to be Autralian. However, the swift government response quickly restores my pride.

19. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179664 by aussieatheist_111 on May 13, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Nuggets of sensibility and half truths mixed with a whole lot of misunderstanding.

20. I Am Evolution

Comment #178528 by aussieatheist_111 on May 11, 2008 at 2:43 pm

" Those of us responding here are probably within the 1% of the population who know enough to credibly have confidence in "evolution by natural selection". But we shouldn't demand or even expect this from others. And I don't think we should speak as though we expect it. "

Given the countless examples of scientists being correct when they say something is a fact (I'm thinking engineering, medical advances, etc.), I think it is rather reasonable to expect the masses to trust the word of scientists. By all means, check it out independently, but trsuting scientists, especially when there is no tentative semantics or throngs of critics and doubters involved, is surely not irrational?